Gate fidelity fluctuations and quantum process invariants
Open accessAbstract
We characterize the quantum gate fidelity in a state-independent manner by giving an explicit expression for its variance. The method we provide can be extended to calculate all higher order moments of the gate fidelity. Using these results, we obtain a simple expression for the variance of a single-qubit system and deduce the asymptotic behavior for large-dimensional quantum systems. Applications of these results to quantum chaos and randomized benchmarking are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The average fidelity of Λ is invariant under Clifford twirling.
“Recall from Sec. (II B) that the average fidelity of Λ, denoted F ave , is invariant under Clifford twirling and so,”
From Characterizing quantum gates via randomized benchmarking (2012) · cites this paper as [40]
Twirling a quantum operation over the Clifford group produces a depolarizing channel and the average fidelity is invariant under the twirling operation.
“Thus twirling a quantum operation over the Clifford group produces a depolarizing channel and the average fidelity is invariant under the twirling operation.”
From Characterizing quantum gates via randomized benchmarking (2012) · cites this paper as [40]
Cites
Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction
Bennett, C. H., DiVincenzo, D. P., Smolin, J. A., & Wootters, W. K. (1996) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.54.3824 · Cited by 5,272 · see citing works
Completely positive linear maps on complex matrices
Choi, M.-D. (1975) · Linear Algebra and its Applications · doi:10.1016/0024-3795(75)90075-0 · Cited by 2,659 · see citing works
Completely Bounded Maps and Operator Algebras
Paulsen, V. I. (2003) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511546631 · Cited by 1,532 · see citing works
Encoding a qubit in an oscillator
Gottesman, D., Kitaev, A., & Preskill, J. (2001) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.64.012310 · Cited by 1,532 · see citing works
Geometry of Quantum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement
Bengtsson, I., & Zyczkowski, K. (2006) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511535048 · Cited by 1,357 · see citing works
Positive functions on 𝐶*-algebras
Stinespring, W. F. (1955) · Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society · doi:10.1090/s0002-9939-1955-0069403-4 · Cited by 1,085 · see citing works
Symmetric informationally complete quantum measurements
Renes, J. M., Blume-Kohout, R., Scott, A. J., & Caves, C. M. (2004) · Journal of Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.1737053 · Cited by 1,061 · see citing works
Self-citationRandomized benchmarking of quantum gates
Knill, E., Leibfried, D., Reichle, R., Britton, J., Blakestad, R. B., Jost, J. D., Langer, C., Ozeri, R., Seidelin, S., & Wineland, D. J. (2008) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.77.012307 · Cited by 1,019 · see citing works
Prescription for experimental determination of the dynamics of a quantum black box
Chuang, I. L., & Nielsen, M. A. (1997) · Journal of Modern Optics · doi:10.1080/09500349708231894 · Cited by 949 · see citing works
A simple formula for the average gate fidelity of a quantum dynamical operation
Nielsen, M. A. (2002) · Physics Letters A · doi:10.1016/s0375-9601(02)01272-0 · Cited by 725 · see citing works
Lie Algebras in Particle Physics
Georgi, H. M. (2018) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9780429499210 · Cited by 722 · see citing works
Exact and approximate unitary 2-designs and their application to fidelity estimation
Dankert, C., Cleve, R., Emerson, J., & Livine, E. R. (2009) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.80.012304 · Cited by 683 · see citing works
Self-citationGeometry of Quantum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement
Bengtsson, I., & Życzkowski, K. (2017) · doi:10.1017/9781139207010 · Cited by 525 · see citing works
Scalable noise estimation with random unitary operators
Emerson, J., Alicki, R., & Życzkowski, K. (2005) · Journal of Optics B: Quantum and Semiclassical Optics · doi:10.1088/1464-4266/7/10/021 · Cited by 502 · see citing works
Self-citationQuantum Computation and Information
Lomonaco, S. J., & Brandt, H. E. (2002) · Contemporary mathematics - American Mathematical Society · doi:10.1090/conm/305 · Cited by 408 · see citing works
Symmetrized Characterization of Noisy Quantum Processes
Emerson, J., Silva, M. P. D., Moussa, O., Ryan, C. A., Laforest, M., Baugh, J., Cory, D. G., & Laflamme, R. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1145699 · Cited by 259 · see citing works
Self-citationFidelity Decay as an Efficient Indicator of Quantum Chaos
Emerson, J., Weinstein, Y. S., Lloyd, S., & Cory, D. G. (2002) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.89.284102 · Cited by 147 · see citing works
Self-citationSelective and Efficient Estimation of Parameters for Quantum Process Tomography
Bendersky, A., Pastawski, F., & Paz, J. P. (2008) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.100.190403 · Cited by 99 · see citing works
Hofmann, H. F. (2005) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.94.160504 · Cited by 98 · see citing works
Characterizing the Structure of Preserved Information in Quantum Processes
Blume-Kohout, R., Ng, H. K., Poulin, D., & Viola, L. (2008) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.100.030501 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Self-citationLie Algebras in Particle Physics
Georgi, H. M., & Jagannathan, K. (1982) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.12947 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Scalable protocol for identification of correctable codes
Silva, M., Magesan, E., Kribs, D. W., & Emerson, J. (2008) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.78.012347 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Self-citationThe distribution of quantum fidelities
Pedersen, L. H., Møller, N. M., & Mølmer, K. (2008) · Physics Letters A · doi:10.1016/j.physleta.2008.10.034 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Fidelity Decay Saturation Level for Initial Eigenstates
Weinstein, Y. S., Emerson, J., Lloyd, S., et al. (2002) · Quantum Information Processing · doi:10.1023/a:1024018431394 · Cited by 17 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Characterizing quantum gates via randomized benchmarking
Magesan, E., Gambetta, J. M., & Emerson, J. (2012) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.85.042311 · Cited by 464 · see citing works
Self-citationQuantum gate learning in qubit networks: Toffoli gate without time-dependent control
Banchi, L., Pancotti, N., & Bose, S. (2016) · npj Quantum Information · doi:10.1038/npjqi.2016.19 · Cited by 74 · see citing works
- Authors
- Magesan, E., Blume-Kohout, R., & Emerson, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Waterloo (CA)
- Los Alamos National Laboratory (US)
- Venue
- Physical Review A
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2011-07-11
- Volume
- 84
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 0556-2791 (ISSN-L)
- 1050-2947
- 1094-1622
- OpenAlex
- W1975988940
- Cited by
- 60
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 2.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review A (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Keywords
- gate fidelity, higher-order moments, single-qubit gates, asymptotic behavior, quantum chaos, randomized benchmarking
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
